Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Rupert Prince

Champions League structure for Cup

Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

The only person suggesting that the format is what will attract fans (or wont) in and of itself is you.

Of course, because blow outs never happen in the knock-out rounds. 

I really don't know what you intended to say with these two sentences. 

Yeah, you've completely missed the point.

No my friend ,you have , everything he's put there is spot on ,it's the Challenge cup ,it's a knockout competition , change it , and it's not the Challenge Cup , the difference to 30/40 years ago is there were more clubs capable of winning it ,now there aren't ,the fans of those clubs no longer in any sort of position to win it have lost interest in it , and the fans of the 5/6 clubs who are capable of winning it are bored and complacent with winning it 

Let's make it a 9s ,it'll be maooooosive 

Edited by GUBRATS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me it’s a simple diagnosis: the Cup has been superseded by the Grand Final as the blue riband and there’s other (cheaper, easier) big days out like Magic Weekend.

Football has had a similar problem with the FA Cup but the frequent shocks keep it interesting. Rugby league doesn’t have anywhere near that frequency. 

Can’t profess to have the solution but whatever it is it’s not a group stage. 

There’s not a lot wrong wth the format per se but the massive gap between the QF and SF does tend to kill the momentum. When it does finally swing around it then rather interferes somewhat with the pointy end of the Super League season.

Hopefully things will improve from next year when it is brought forward.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

For me it’s a simple diagnosis: the Cup has been superseded by the Grand Final as the blue riband and there’s other (cheaper, easier) big days out like Magic Weekend.

Football has had a similar problem with the FA Cup but the frequent shocks keep it interesting. Rugby league doesn’t have anywhere near that frequency. 

Can’t profess to have the solution but whatever it is it’s not a group stage. 

There’s not a lot wrong wth the format per se but the massive gap between the QF and SF does tend to kill the momentum. When it does finally swing around it then rather interferes somewhat with the pointy end of the Super League season.

Hopefully things will improve from next year when it is brought forward.

I'd agree with pretty much all of that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, scotchy1 said:

You're a 55 year old man. 

58 actually , but all normal people couldn't care less , but you it seems do , that says a lot more about you than me , you realise people are laughing at you and your psuedo interlect , it's a shame as you do have some good ideas and can occasionally contribute to interesting debate , all the best 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Intellect

HTH

You see that really is the difference between us ,I couldn't care less I spelled a word wrong on an internet forum ,I could as you would do in similar circumstances quicky edit my post , but I'm not that insecure , I am not perfect ,I don't pretend to be ,it isn't important 

Goodnight 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, scotchy1 said:

There is a lot wrong with the format and you have explained why.

The idea that on one hand you want to argue that knockout cup competitions have lost their lustre but that the problem is the format doesnt make any sense.

A group stage isnt more attractive than a knockout stage in and of itself but a format that allows you to sell in advance, get buy-In and engagement for more than one game, that is harder to win, that has more visibility that is played more often all are. 

People who argue that changing the CC format wont make things better .d that licensing wont make things better are both right but both completely miss the point.its not the format but the opportunities it opens up.

Or we can carry on as we are and insist its everyone else in the world who is wrong.

The problem is the Cup has lost prestige. A group stage consisting of two teams taking it in turns to whip a third would do vanishly little to address that.

How do you restore the prestige of the Cup when it has been superseded? I suspect you can’t. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Man of Kent said:

The problem is the Cup has lost prestige. A group stage consisting of two teams taking it in turns to whip a third would do vanishly little to address that.

How do you restore the prestige of the Cup when it has been superseded? I suspect you can’t. 

You quite simply return to how the CC was played for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Oliver Clothesoff said:

So the idea is for Super League teams to go from twenty nine rounds at present down to twenty two rounds plus a minimum of four Challenge Cup group games? I just cannot see clubs agreeing to it. 

I know Michael Carter has cited thirteen as being the minimum amount of home games needed to be breaking even/profitable but I take it his calculations are based off Super League opposition and not Championship opposition and I do wonder if this would impact upon any proposal of this nature. 

You have to think of the existing TV contract, we have a deal to show X amount of games over the season, a smaller league season in place and I’m not sure how we meet the threshold of live games, if we can meet it and if Sky want to show the same amount of games as the contract stated. We’d be cutting the season by 27% from 30 Super League games last year down to 22 with this proposed idea. 

 

Season ticket wiseIF I were close enugh to get to games enough to justify a season pass (or membership as FC call them) I'd pay same amount for fewer games if that meant less repetitive fixtures and better quality overall due to less fatigue. Current adult members at FC get games for somewhere between £10.71 to £19.28.game plus all the other perks thrown in. £270/13 is still only £20.77.

Money from away ticket sales went up to 25% and does the 13 matches to break even take into account the money from 'magic' w/e, I think more fans would come to games if there were fewer, especially the duplicated fixtures.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

A group stage would allow clubs to sell tickets long in advance, something we know increases ticket sales. 

It would allow us to plan the fixtures accordingly so that each week we had at least 2 premier fixtures for TV.

It would allow us to plan so that if the third (or 4th) side was a smaller side they would host the bigger side and sell that as a big event for them. 

It could, depend on how it was fit in to the season, allow us to have RL on terrestrial for consecutive weeks (maybe 3/4/5 maybe up to 8 weeks) building affiliation and familiarity with the comp and game

If we can build crowds and visibility and familiarity we will build prestige 

Eight consecutive weeks of Challenge Cup fixtures, eh?

And what might Super League have to say about that, do you think?

Edited by Man of Kent
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

depends when it is. 

If it was from say boxing day to February. Almost certainly nothing, probably hugely in favour as a build up to SL, teams starting the season running, no breaks etc. 

In reality, a 10-month competitive season isn’t going to happen for the benefit of a rival competition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, scotchy1 said:

If 16 teams qualified from a 4 team group, group stage only 2 weeks would be added to the length of the season. if 1 did, i.e we went straight to the quarters,  the season would be 1 week longer. 

 

Sounds great, Scotchio. Send it to Mr Rimmer.

G’night!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the end of the day, there can only be one major winner in a league of professional teams. As soon as the Grand Final was brought in by SL, the Challenge Cup was on the way down. 

It may be best to make the CC only for amateur and semi-pro clubs, and then play the final as a warm up for the  Grand Final. 

It is becoming like the FA cup, a nice competition but very secondary achievement, despite it's great history. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Rupert Prince said:

The selections of the pots the number of them and who is in them are entirely yours. There are other ways it can be done.

The Cup is a draw and as such is down to luck.  The current system is "seeded " already... probably too heavily seeded.

yes i do get that... it was why I used the words, "could" and "example" to show that I understood that.. 

the point of the post was that actually you can have as much jeopardy in this set up as you could with a straight knock out dependent on the draw and when it is played in the system... thought I had made that pretty clear though to be honest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Man of Kent said:

The competitive season would last from December to October. Ain’t happening. 

A lot would depend on how many games there are in the regular season and in particular how many pool games there are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RP London said:

yes i do get that... it was why I used the words, "could" and "example" to show that I understood that.. 

the point of the post was that actually you can have as much jeopardy in this set up as you could with a straight knock out dependent on the draw and when it is played in the system... thought I had made that pretty clear though to be honest.

Yes.  I was not intending to be argumentative. I guess i was intent on pressing the point.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to admit that at first listening to it I was thinking "no, don't exclude the lower division clubs etc" but the more the argument was made about duty of care, mirroring competition for lower divisional clubs and possibly marketing the early rounds (which i thought was a brilliant idea to be honest) then i like the idea. The only change I'd make is don't seed the teams in the draw for the rounds - let there be potential for the top three in Super League to play each other for a place in the knockout rounds, really market the competition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rupert Prince said:

Yes.  I was not intending to be argumentative. I guess i was intent on pressing the point.

fair enough.. sorry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only way I’d consider a group stage added to the tournament would be if the competition/the clubs competing marketed it very differently, almost mimicking T20 cricket, where non-Cricket fans turn out in their numbers for a good time and a sporting event. 

Lets say that the twelve Super League clubs did agree to the idea (not that they would) of dropping League games down to 23 (your standard H&A and a Magic Weekend). After eleven or twelve rounds, Super League comes to a halt at, roughly, the halfway stage, for five weeks and that’s when the festival of Rugby League known as the Challenge Cup begins. With fewer games in the Super League season, the season could start slightly later and the start of the Challenge Cup could be aimed at May/June sort of time.

The competition would be made up of 15 teams, the existing twelve Super League teams, last season’s relegated side from Super League and two others. The two others could be based upon League standings from the year previous, you could have an application process or you could make it invitational. Whatever.  

The fifteen are then split into three groups of five and each side will play four group games, two at home and two away. The top two from each group and the two best ranking third place sides from the three groups  would qualify for the Quarter Finals. 

However, the competition, it’s sponsors and its participants need to buy into the idea. Clubs need to be offering more than just a Rugby game to get fans in. With the competition aimed at starting in May/June time, the weather will have hopefully improved and clubs would hopefully be offering fan parks, pop up bars, food stalls, activities for kids etc with games scheduled, barring the television games, at Saturday’s and Sunday’s to make them more accessible for all. 

Once the four weeks are up, the game goes back to Super League with the QF’s, SF’s and Final fitted in. 

That’s the only way I could see this working, a huge marketing and advertising push to make the game “cool” and the equivalent of T20 cricket without reducing players or any other gimmick. 

Edited by Oliver Clothesoff
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, ojx said:

At the end of the day, there can only be one major winner in a league of professional teams. As soon as the Grand Final was brought in by SL, the Challenge Cup was on the way down. 

It may be best to make the CC only for amateur and semi-pro clubs, and then play the final as a warm up for the  Grand Final. 

It is becoming like the FA cup, a nice competition but very secondary achievement, despite it's great history. 

If Super League clubs ever have to reduce the number of games then the Challenge Cup would probably be the first on the chopping block. Crowds have dropped because nowadays the league is the be all  Aand end all and I don't think knockout cup competitions will ever be as prominent as they once were. Adding a group stage would just lengthen the season as there is no way that clubs would reduce the number of league games that they play. If the final wasn't getting the decentish crowds that it does I'm not entirely convinced that we would still have a Challenge Cup.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This year, we were knocked out of the Challenge Cup in the 4th round at Thatto Heath. It's obviously a result we want to forget.

For Thatto Heath however, it was a huge occasion and achievement. A bigger than average crowd, the challenge cup on display, the Mayor of St Helens in her chain of office watching from the clubhouse balcony, and the game watched live by thousands on television (BBC red button I think).

Thatto Heath didn't just beat a League 1 team, they beat a league 1 team in the 4th round of the Challenge Cup. That makes it special.

There's no harm in discussing ideas on how to increase the attendance at the final, or making the competition more interesting, but I think that any idea that denies the Thatto Heath's of this world their well earned special moment, is a bad idea.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Oliver Clothesoff said:

The only way I’d consider a group stage added to the tournament would be if the competition/the clubs competing marketed it very differently, almost mimicking T20 cricket, where non-Cricket fans turn out in their numbers for a good time and a sporting event. 

Lets say that the twelve Super League clubs did agree to the idea (not that they would) of dropping League games down to 23 (your standard H&A and a Magic Weekend). After eleven or twelve rounds, Super League comes to a halt at, roughly, the halfway stage, for five weeks and that’s when the festival of Rugby League known as the Challenge Cup begins. With fewer games in the Super League season, the season could start slightly later and the start of the Challenge Cup could be aimed at May/June sort of time.

The competition would be made up of 15 teams, the existing twelve Super League teams, last season’s relegated side from Super League and two others. The two others could be based upon League standings from the year previous, you could have an application process or you could make it invitational. Whatever.  

The fifteen are then split into three groups of five and each side will play four group games, two at home and two away. The top two from each group and the two best ranking third place sides from the three groups  would qualify for the Quarter Finals. 

However, the competition, it’s sponsors and its participants need to buy into the idea. Clubs need to be offering more than just a Rugby game to get fans in. With the competition aimed at starting in May/June time, the weather will have hopefully improved and clubs would hopefully be offering fan parks, pop up bars, food stalls, activities for kids etc with games scheduled, barring the television games, at Saturday’s and Sunday’s to make them more accessible for all. 

Once the four weeks are up, the game goes back to Super League with the QF’s, SF’s and Final fitted in. 

That’s the only way I could see this working, a huge marketing and advertising push to make the game “cool” and the equivalent of T20 cricket without reducing players or any other gimmick. 

So the non SL clubs don't get to play in the Challenge Cup ? , Then it isn't the Challenge Cup , is it ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

So the non SL clubs don't get to play in the Challenge Cup ? , Then it isn't the Challenge Cup , is it ?

They do. There’s currently 12 Super League teams, this would be a 15 team competition. 15-12=3. There’s three non-Super League sides, one less than many have suggested in their proposals. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...